We have an oak door between our living room and enclosed front porch. I think it used to be the original exterior door.

It has a 22" x 60" piece of glass in it, that has a 1 1/2" bevel on it's edges.

When my husband was refinishing the door, I had one of the few requirements I have of his remodeling work:

That glass MUST be replaced if it ends up broken. We we did a little research and at the time, got quoted over $19000 to replace it with an old piece of glass.

Knowing that, he was EXTREMELY careful, and we still have the original beveled glass.

@Bungalowmo,In with ya 100%

Would love to build a new home that feels like it's 200 years old.

Thanks 1425...we're actually one chunk of a much larger consciousness.

The ones that will watch a movie & while others are listening & watching the actors...we're looking at porch detail, or a stunning staircase with a gas lamp on the newel post you could only dream of having in your house.

We know who we are....

@bungalowmo, we Sure do!

http://houzz.com/photos/11280902

We LOVE our old house! This is the third old house we have renovated, and by far our favorite. There is no way we could afford to build a new house with the quality of detail that is in our 1907 beauty!
The so-called "aggravation" that old house reno causes is far outweighed by the feeling of accomplishment and pride we feel with each project we complete.

http://houzz.com/ideabooks/12764067

Idea book about our journey with our old Edwardian

Hmmm tried to post link above to idea book but don't know what I am doing wrong....

Some of you have stated that you wish you could build a new old house. Well, a number of years ago I was fortunate enough to put some of my work in such a house. Probably a once in a lifetime experience. I was the third "cabinetmaker" on the job, the others weren't good enough (fluffing my feathers?, yep, made me feel good when I found this out). The house is a Georgian Colonial, inside and out. The millwork is outstanding, like something you would find in an 18th century home. Everything is top shelf and custom. This home is one of a kind and the quality surpasses any other house I have ever been in. It was not built for flash, it was built for historical significance and quality. No expense was spared. The owner knew what he wanted and built it, 4 years of continual construction.

So it is possible to build a "new old house", but most of us will never be able to afford it.

Here is a picture of a room I did.

The columns of raised panels are made from one full width board, and each pair of columns are book matched. It is all cherry.

sandiocd...wow....beautiful old gal you have there!!! Going through your ideabook on the work you've done. You must be so proud of how everything turned out!!!

Al...that room is gorgeous! I wish I had 1/10th of the woodworking skills you have. The talents of some of our members here amazes me!!

Thx bungalowmo! Didn't know if anyone could see the idea book or not.
Al Fortunato--Mad Skills!!

Oh yeah, your home is gorgeous! What part of the country are you in? I'm guessing East coast. I'm in Virginia & I could see that place in my area.

Good guess--I am your neighbor in wild wonderful West Virginia!

@American Woman--our 100+ yr old home DOES have an elevator! The previous owners lived in the house for 43 years, and installed the lift for the lady when 3 stories of stairs became too much for her. It goes from the butler's pantry downstairs into an enclosed sleeping porch upstairs. My laundry room is there, now, and it is very cool not to have to carry things up and down the stairs...

I live in a pre-Civil War home that my husband's family built. I love it, but the upkeep is a bank breaker. Regarding an earlier statement about why update an old house vs. restoring it, I don't want to live in a house that didn't have electricity OR plumbing when it was built. No chamber pots and water buckets for me, thank you!

I love old homes. I would buy one in a heartbeat if I had the money to restore one to its original glory while bringing it into modern times, as well.

There's nothing like old house charm. Beware new house buyers- they are not built to last and could be quite expensive to maintain. It is a misnomer to think if you buy new/newer you aren't going to have problems. Fact is: everything degrades over time. All homeowners have maintenance issues.

I will post a picture of my lacking character, four year old house. What may look like a cookie cutter home to some is filled with love and modern conveniences....like a finished basement for the teenagers.

All things equal, I would go for a newer house again. The spouse and I are not handy and we have too many electrical items. I do like to visit old houses and see the charm...especially woodwork....just don't have the skills or patience to own one again.

It seems a disservice to categorize all new builds as shoddy, slapdash construction. While some houses are being built by companies selling features rather than quality, there are still small, local builders who take pride in craftsmanship and building a house that lasts. They may be more expensive, which makes it harder for them to compete in the market.

I weighed in on this near the beginning, but I think I should add something. I love houses! Any houses...All houses. I would move right in to any house offered and start personalizing it.

There's a mansion in Chicago that has been unoccupied for I-forget-how-many years. It's for sale on a LARGE plot of land and in sad condition...it makes my mouth water.

I recently spied a prefab two-car garage that had been plunked on several acres of ridge in West Virginia. It contains a stove, sink, potty, shower and a room divider, of sorts...I'm there!

I don't think there's a house of any vaguely restorable description that I would turn down, if offered. There's always something to do that will make it uniquely my own.

Really, the only house I couldn't consider is one that is so perfect that it would be criminal to change anything...How likely am I to run across that?!

@joannpb... I think you have something there! It's all about getting what you enjoy and making it your own. Almost every house has its own kind of charm but many of us (raises my hand) look down our noses at "cookie cutter" houses without remembering that it's what the owners bring to the house that makes it charming not the other way around.

I do feel we baby boomers tended to head the march early on toward those tract houses and wanted everything new, new, new. As we got older, we sort of woke up and looked around and realized, "hmmm...new can be a bit boring." So then we charged off in the direction of renovating the houses we once snubbed. Our kids then joined the parade mainly because the newer homes were so expensive that "fixer-uppers" were what they could afford. Now we have the Property Brothers and others "teaching" us that old was better and look what can be done (with lots of dollars, skill, time and experience).

All that brings us to this thread and the somewhat divisive nature of it. Just because a house is over 100 years old doesn't make it always charming, just as a new house isn't always the best way to go either. What, I think, is truly important is that we allow ourselves to enjoy our homes and to personalize them to our way of life, our family's style and to avoid being a carbon copy of anyone else. We are all individuals and I think our homes should reflect that individuality, even if the floor plan is the same as the neighbor down the street.

Had the 100 year old house had more charm on the outside - wrap around porch - large windows - gingerbread treatments - I'd have gone with that - I'm in Georgia where so many beautifully restored Victorian or Plantation style mansions are - I'd kill to be able to afford one. But - you'd have to keep in mind the cost of updating it to be livable.

Anything with running water, a septic system and a roof is livable (to start) for me. Then, just let me at it. The house I bought, as a newlywed, in the early seventies, needed a septic system before the bank would consider a mortgage...you'd be astonished at the twisted double-dealing that I engaged in to accomplish that!

I've never yet heard that there's any such thing as a maintenance-free house. A young workman I ran into shortly ago said his father had told him, "If you have a house, a car, and a woman, you're always gonna have a problem." Told him if he lacked any of those things, the problems wd be even worse. This seems to go especially for houses! However, I guess it also depends upon what you consider "livable." I still think the older house with the basics is the better deal since it allows you to improve as you see fit and as the need arises, using the extra money where and when it matters most to you, rather than paying that fancy new-house premium for whatever somebody else thought you, the generic buyer, would value.

ours is an 1848...this photo was last Thurs when we got new copper gutters

Lovely! I can't get enough of houses built with stone!

We are restoring an 1850's Georgian stone house. It is a work in progress!

The job of restoration is double the work: take out, fix, duplicate, and put back. But the rewards are 10x the effort! What we are doing we hope will last another 150 years!

Mary Haslett! That is fabulous!

I like to know that everything in my house is in good standing and safe to live in, no surprises. Plus, I am w germaphobe and older homes are usually a little too musty for me. Unless of course there was major renovation done, then I might consider it:)

Older home without a doubt. Mine is a 1935 "stately colonial." Brick all around, solid home built with integrity. Original chestnut trim around doorways and a ton of character. That old charm is what sold me. Newer homes are cookie-cutter, have no character and are not necessarily built with pride or even quality. Older homes all the way!!

I have lived in brand new, Edwardian flat in San Francisco, Arts and Crafts Okland bungalow ca. 1915, 1969 Connecticut Colonial, and Chicagoland 1910 Colonial Revival. In the brand new you could hear every step anyone made upstairs, or next room, including the kids blowing bubbles in the bathtub! And in the 1969 the construction was "lite" and not well insulated :(.

In the Edwardian SF flat, Arts and Crafts 1915, and our current home built 1910-1911, while there may have been repair work to do, they were all solid construction, lathe and plaster, and hardwoods. The moment the front door was closed it was peaceful and calm inside. The charm of the architecture made it a home, and I don't know that I could move to a "new" home unless I scrutinized the building of it. New builds are rarely the quality of an historic home. Our old growth oak doors, trim and beams are irreplaceable, and in original or restored condition. The floors have character, and the home feels alive. We are fortunate that all the owners of the house have been "stewards", and taken good care of it. In fact the "bump out" of the kitchen done in ca. 2001 is the part of the house that has needed attention in particular - not insulated well, and some leaks!

Gearing up to build a small passive solar cottage; I'm getting a friend of mine to build it, as I've seen his work - first rate! I've also been visiting a few architectural salvage companies to look at fixtures, doors, cabinets, and assorted bits and pieces; found some nice treasures - a lot of the older stuff is nicer that what you can purchase new today. I guess you could say I'm combining the best of both worlds.

A couple years back I came across a small home that was slated to be demolished; had I been in a position to do so, I would have saved it and moved it. It needed some TLC, but it had good bones. It was a cute place, too...

When I was visiting my parents in South Carolina last Christmas, I checked out some new homes being built. They looked nice, but they were all cookie-cutter, and it was almost mortifying to see how fast they were being constructed. I noticed a lot of short cuts and dubious build quality in some of them - yikes!

Claire from the colonies, thank you fro this comment. when I build I will certainly keep these matters in strict demand because like you I like my peace and quiet inside as much as the next person.

I remember back when I was (I think) 11 years old, watching a local builder working on a house. somehow there was a gap at one end, near the ridgeline in the cathedral ceiling (first cathedral ceiling I'd ever seen). He simply cut cardboard to fit, filled the gap with sawdust and shavings, covered it with more cardboard and painted over it. On the outside, a piece of brickface was glued on.

That was in 1958, and I can just imagine someone looking at that "beautiful old house" now and thinking of "restoration".

If a well-built house is properly maintained it needn't be an undue expense. Every home, old or new, needs to be kept up to avoid expensive disasters. All too many costly re-dos are simply because homeowners see some things as "dated" and others as "trending" (two really stupid and meaningless terms) and feel that every ten years or so they need to "gut" perfectly serviceable rooms and replace with whatever the fad of the year is. Then that ticky-tacky faces the same fate in another ten years. No, thanks.

I truly love the character, charm, and the beautiful woodwork in old houses. I did not have $$ or time for a fixer upper, however. My house was two years old when I bought it in 2010 and was just what I needed!

Beverlynn, we (the re- whatevers) need you and others like you to live in the houses first. What would we have to rehab if nobody wanted to start with a new house? We need you to live in, love, use and even abuse a home so that some day, one of us can fall in love with it all over again and mark it with our own unique stamp of love.

New, so someone a hundred years from now can vote for Century Club.

That's cute, Mark. Especially from an architect...lol... I can only imagine how funny we sound to folks outside the States that have homes in their countries that are many centuries old. :)

I won't be around to see today's houses age and become admired examples of 21st Century architecture, but I'd love to peek ahead fifty or so years to see which building materials, innovations and design features remain popular and become tomorrow's "great examples!"

Wow, 50/50 split!

I lived in a new construction once. Wasn't standing 10 years and the ceiling was cracking, the roof was leaking, the steps outside were crumbling, among other things. Thank goodness I was renting. People worry about 100+ year old houses falling apart and needing maintenance, well, at least they've lasted this long. Houses are just made so cheaply in the last few decades, I wouldn't buy a house made after 1960 unless I watched it being built, and I'd be reluctant to buy one made after 1930. At least with an old house, you can see how well it's aging, but with a new one, you don't know if it will be falling down within a couple decades. That being said, if you want a house with a new looking interior, please buy a new house or one that someone else has already gutted instead of gutting the architectural history from an old one. I just can't understand why people do that.

thethistle, I agree 100% with both your points.

All things are NEVER equal between these two choices, as has been reflected in the comments. It's cheaper to build from the ground up than to restore, but then you could be stuck with shoddy materials and/or workmanship, and fast-grown wood is no match for old growth cedar, oak and cypress. However, starting from scratch allows the possibility of eco building and lower utility costs. So - it's really down to your personal preference, purse, and availability.

I voted new construction, because I lived in a very very old colonial home built around 1810 and even though I just loved the layout and the ambiance... I did not like the very bad mean and possibly evil ghost that lived there!!! I really really wanted to love living there, but I could not stay... I had a toddler and a middle schooler to think about. As it was, my toddler was injured on moving day when a book shelf waiting to be loaded by the movers was pushed down onto her in front of all of us... it was not leaning, and no other explanation for why it just tipped... needless to say, they hurried up and finished packing and loading our stuff! The previous owners did nothing to update the utilities either so my oil bill was over $1500 a month in the winter and this is not an exaggeration! (I think the wife knew it was haunted, because she told me that she was never coming back to that house no matter what it needed to have fixed... she hated to be there and refused to be there alone... we were renting from them - thank God they let us rent without a contract to make us stay, and made provisions for if the cost of heating the home was too expensive we could just inform them we were moving 30 days notice and we could go.) My husband and I really really do love the look and the architecture of old homes... but our bodies now say, absolutely not... it hurts too much to do the upkeep. There is a home builder designer in Vermont (Connor Homes) that builds new "old" homes that you can purchase like a kit home (like they made years ago!). They have designs you can pick from and you can choose finishes and add your own needs or additions as well. And they store your house parts until the construction site is ready to put them into place. They are just beautiful... but expensive. However, you get the look without the high energy bills & you know your house won't burn down due to flawed or old wiring, or end up with a crawlspace or basement full of water due to a plumbing issue... We have a house built in 2007, it is junk! I admit nothing beats the strength and longevity of old world building methods!!! When my husband retires from the Navy, we are moving... maybe we will buy a new build and make it look old by putting in century old architectural finishing touches ourselves. I would rather spend my money on finishes than on fixing an old structure to make it stable or comfortable... plus if you don't have a lot of money... you may never get it the way you want it! Hopefully in 6-7 years we can find a builder that has pride in his work "again" and will build homes accordingly, like they did 100 years ago, but with new and better building materials/methods, and doesn't cut corners in the construction process.... one can only hope someday the construction trade will again be one of respectability!!! I would also add that homes built between 1940 and 1960 are pretty well made too, but you would still have to update electrical, plumbing and insulation if you want to have any money left over for the month after you get your electric/oil bill... plus, you want to make sure there isn't any old from previous owners that did not maintain their home properly like... letting a roof leak into buckets in the attic that they empty, but didn't tell you about until it was too late and leaked all over your beautiful dining room table... yep that happened to us there too! And I also find that aging owners stop taking care of their homes in the last 20 to 30 years of their lives, not because they don't want to, but because they physically cannot do it... so you will find a lot of delayed maintenance and very out of date finishes. I could go on and on...

oh yah... I would however consider buying home built before 1960 IF I knew it was gutted and redone by a well-to-do owner who is picky about making it right used architectural features recycled from that home or other homes in it's era and did it right... and is now selling, only because they are either too old to maintain it anymore or just want a new project. THEN I would jump at it IF I could afford what they were selling it for. Sometimes... you never know, you just might find a diamond that is overlooked.

If you buy a house that was gutted and updated, unless it is exceptionally well done you're getting an older frame with a "new" picture in it... probably not as sturdy as an authentic older house and also without the craftsmanship of the original. But yes, there is the occasional gem.

I would think if someone was going to go through the effort to gut a home to update plumbing, electrical, insulation, remove broken or sagging plaster walls, remove mold and replace deteriorating/rotting or termite damaged parts... that they would be meticulous to watch any contractors they brought in to make sure they did a good job and did it right... if they save as much moldings, baseboards, trim-work, etc. and anything else special to the home and put it back in or replicated it using a master craftsman, then I would think... it would be just as nice. By the way, there is a school in Charleston that is teaching "old world" building skills... so there are some craftsman still out there. They teach masonry, ironwork, plastering, carpentry, plaster molding, stonework, timber framing etc. - The American College of Building Arts is located in North Charleston, SC and it opened in 2006. There was an article about them in the Washington Post. There are still people out there that want to do it right... at least, I would hope they would.

An old house with modern facilities would be the best! Old houses have a different "air" and definately their own personality; as long as it does not cause problems to its tenants due to wear and tare. If I ever had money, I would like to buy a very old house, with carved stair railings and plastered ceiling and bringing to date all systems in the house like electricity, plumbing, drainage... If I were a richman...

Depends on location. I live in San Diego, 100 year old homes are not "charming" like they are in the south.

Generally new construction unless in a historic district.